The downside was at the time when radios could not transmit the capacity the
end users needed.
Syncing does not allow the full capacity of a single half duplex radio to be
used in what ever direction needed, which is possible in a non-synced half
duplex system.
In low bandwdith systems, such as < 10 mbps generation PtMP systems. This
was always the benefit of Trango, that allowed Trango to be used for higher
ARPU systems than Canopy.
Non-Sync was about geting maximum speed out of a SINGLE radio. This is key,
because it let WISPs spend less money, to serve custoemrs with more
capacity.
Understanding that in the earlier days it was IMPOSSIBLE to predict what
percentage of bandwidth you might need in each direction, at time of cell
site design.
Now as the industry changes, and grows, the noise floor grows with it, and
applications that are used on our service also change. Things like VOIP
start to require the FullDuplex mentality. And as noise grows, and our
capiol and finace with it, we now have the abilty to convert to syncing
systems, where avoidance of noise, and reuse of channels becomes a bigger
advantage than the non-sync systems previously offered.
Tom DeReggi
RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Scrivner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2007 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Fw: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
I personally wish all manufacturers would standardize on a GPS sync system
to allow for multiple reuse of frequencies. This is one place where
Motorola definitely has the right idea. I have never seen a convincing
argument for any reason why GPS sync is not a great thing for reuse of
spectrum and I feel it should be encouraged by us to standards bodies who
are designing the future generations of unlicensed radio platforms. Is
there a downside to GPS sync?
Scriv
Mike Hammett wrote:
How difficult is it to engineer sectors with greater isolation? With
only 50 MHz, we're going to have to become champions of spectrum reuse.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
----- Original Message ----- From: "Marlon K. Schafer (509) 982-2181"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Principal WISPA Member List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:00 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Fw: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
Getting closer to a 3650 reality!
Marlon
(509) 982-2181 (408) 907-6910 (Vonage)
Consulting services
42846865 (icq) WISP Operator since
1999!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.odessaoffice.com/wireless
www.odessaoffice.com/marlon/cam
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Lubar"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "FCC Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 9:54 AM
Subject: [WISPA FCC] FCC 3650 band response today..
Greetings everyone..
I wanted to make everyone aware of today's published response from the
FCC regarding the reconsideration of its 3650 NPRM..
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-99A1.pdf
Note that the petitions for reconsideration of this rule making have
been denied and 3650 band usage in the United States is now one step
closer.
Respectfully,
Dan Lubar
RelayServices
_______________________________________________
FCC mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/fcc
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database:
269.8.11/838 - Release Date: 6/7/2007 2:21 PM
--
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
